Using Reference Values to Identify Profiles of Swallowing Impairment in a Case Series of Individuals With Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: In this article, we illustrate use of a systematic approach to rating videofluoroscopic swallowing studies (VFSS), the Analysis of Swallowing Physiology: Events, Kinematics and Timing (ASPEKT) method. The method is applied to a clinical case series of individuals with a history of traumatic spinal cord injury (tSCI) requiring surgical intervention using a posterior approach. Previous studies suggest that swallowing is highly variable in this population given heterogeneity in mechanisms, location and extent of injury, and in surgical management approaches. METHOD: The case series involved 6 individuals who were at least 1 month postsurgery for management of tSCI. Participants completed a VFSS using a standardized bolus protocol. Each VFSS was blindly rated in duplicate using the ASPEKT method and compared with published reference values. RESULTS: The analysis revealed considerable heterogeneity across this clinical sample. Penetration-aspiration scale scores of 3 or higher were not observed in this cohort. Of note, patterns of impairment did emerge, suggesting there are some commonalities across profiles in this population, including the presence of residue associated with poor pharyngeal constriction, reduced upper esophageal opening diameter, and short upper esophageal sphincter opening duration. CONCLUSIONS: Although the participants in this clinical sample shared a history of tSCI requiring surgical intervention using a posterior approach, there was great heterogeneity in swallowing profile. Using a systematic method to identify atypical swallowing parameters can guide clinical decision making for determining rehabilitative targets and measuring swallowing outcomes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".